> One down side of the bling-bling (17"-24") wheels is the really increase
the
> rotating mass and expose the wheel to more damage.
My 17x8.5" Walker Evan beadlocks weigh the same as my old 15x10" Hellcats
with Champion beadlocks. Also, the 39" Krawlers on WE's, and 38.5"sx on the
Hellcats both weighed in at 120#'s each.

As far as exposing the wheel to more damage, I haven't seen it. Seems the
drive flange cover takes most the punishment.

There is a local 4x4 place out here that the guy has 17" on his EB. I just
saw it recently and they look really GOOD! I'm going to try and maybe do a
story on his truck for Bronco Driver after the holidays. Very nice rig!

> One down side of the bling-bling (17"-24") wheels is the really increase
the
> rotating mass and expose the wheel to more damage.
My 17x8.5" Walker Evan beadlocks weigh the same as my old 15x10" Hellcats
with Champion beadlocks. Also, the 39" Krawlers on WE's, and 38.5"sx on the
Hellcats both weighed in at 120#'s each.

As far as exposing the wheel to more damage, I haven't seen it. Seems the
drive flange cover takes most the punishment.

Well, I certainly don't have the experience level you do so I will take your
word for the damage exposure. But you did illustrate that you move the
rotating mass further out in your statement below, not to mention your new
rims are only 85% as wide as the old ones and still weigh the same. I
realize I am splitting hairs but the more unsprung weight you have the worse
your vehicle will ride and handle. Having more rotational mass located
further out on the wheel will require more braking torque and engine torque.
Except for maybe in rock crawling adding weight or moving weight further out
on the wheel is always a bad thing, but maybe a worthy compromise in some
situations.

My point is that there is a trade off with going to larger wheels, not that
they are bad.... I certainly like the looks of some of the 18" wheels I have
seen but it is not worth the trade off for me.

> One down side of the bling-bling (17"-24") wheels is the really increase
the
> rotating mass and expose the wheel to more damage.
My 17x8.5" Walker Evan beadlocks weigh the same as my old 15x10" Hellcats
with Champion beadlocks. Also, the 39" Krawlers on WE's, and 38.5"sx on the
Hellcats both weighed in at 120#'s each.

As far as exposing the wheel to more damage, I haven't seen it. Seems the
drive flange cover takes most the punishment.

Not to hop on anyone thread here but is it 16s or 16.5s that don't have the
safety bead, assuming you don't have beadlocks of course.
Mike
Always gettin held
down by the man.
Damn the man!
----- Original Message -----
From: <TonyNokes@Freightliner.com>
To: <bwickert@sti.net>; <bfix@broncofix.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 11:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Bfix] [EBML] Wheel Size

> Well, I certainly don't have the experience level you do so I will take
> your
> word for the damage exposure. But you did illustrate that you move the
> rotating mass further out in your statement below, not to mention your new
> rims are only 85% as wide as the old ones and still weigh the same. I
> realize I am splitting hairs but the more unsprung weight you have the
> worse
> your vehicle will ride and handle. Having more rotational mass located
> further out on the wheel will require more braking torque and engine
> torque.
> Except for maybe in rock crawling adding weight or moving weight further
> out
> on the wheel is always a bad thing, but maybe a worthy compromise in some
> situations.
>
> My point is that there is a trade off with going to larger wheels, not
> that
> they are bad.... I certainly like the looks of some of the 18" wheels I
> have
> seen but it is not worth the trade off for me.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Wickert [mailto:bwickert@sti.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 9:51 AM
> To: TonyNokes@Freightliner.com; bfix@broncofix.com
> Subject: Re: [Bfix] [EBML] Wheel Size
>
>
>> One down side of the bling-bling (17"-24") wheels is the really increase
> the
>> rotating mass and expose the wheel to more damage.
> My 17x8.5" Walker Evan beadlocks weigh the same as my old 15x10" Hellcats
> with Champion beadlocks. Also, the 39" Krawlers on WE's, and 38.5"sx on
> the
> Hellcats both weighed in at 120#'s each.
>
> As far as exposing the wheel to more damage, I haven't seen it. Seems the
> drive flange cover takes most the punishment.
>
> Brian Wickert
> Hanford, CA 93230
> My pics: http://www.vintagebronco.com/bwickert/
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <TonyNokes@Freightliner.com>
> To: <bfix@broncofix.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 9:13 AM
> Subject: RE: [Bfix] [EBML] Wheel Size
>
>
>> I think 16" are probably the way to go. You get a slightly larger rim
> which
>> should help a little with tire squirm. Also, the 16" wheels afford huge
>> selection of tire choices at decent prices. I also believe they will
>> offer
>> plenty of room for bigger disk brakes.
>>
>> One down side of the bling-bling (17"-24") wheels is the really increase
> the
>> rotating mass and expose the wheel to more damage.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian Wickert [mailto:bwickert@sti.net]
>> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:07 PM
>> To: 70 Bronco; ebml@bronco.com; bfix@broncofix.com
>> Subject: Re: [Bfix] [EBML] Wheel Size
>>
>>
>> The bigger rims help to control sidewall flex of the radial tires. This
>> isn't an issue for Bias ply tires, so 15" rims work great with 38.5"
>> SX's.
>>
>> Brian Wickert
>> CalROC #23
>> Explorer Serpentine setups for sale.
>>
>> My Pics: http://www.vintagebronco.com/bwickert/
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "70 Bronco" <Bronco@yourcomputersolution.net>
>> To: <ebml@bronco.com>; <bfix@broncofix.com>
>> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 8:56 PM
>> Subject: [EBML] Wheel Size
>>
>>
>> > When looking for new wheels do I want bigger or smaller?
>> >
>> > Bigger is mainly for looks, right? What's an ideal size for a Bronco.
>> Right now I am thinking I am going to run 38.5" (maybe 36-37) tires.
>> What
>> size wheel would you recommend running for this size tire? I was
>> thinking
>> staying around 15" or 16" but not sure on the width.
>> >
>> > Any suggestions?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Todd
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> > Early Bronco Mailing List (EBML)
>> > Unsubscribe: majordomo@bronco.com unsubscribe EBML
>> > 'youremailid@yourisp.com' in the messagebody.
>> > To modify your account (switch to digest or to real-time, stop messages
>> for vacation, etc.), goto:
>> > http://mail.bronco.com/lists/EBML
>> > Admin address: EBML-owner@bronco.com
>>
>> ********************* BFix Site Sponsor ****************************
>> Cage Offroad Suspension lifts, Offroad accessories and more!
>> http://www.cageoffroad.com
>> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>> List help? http://www.broncofix.com or email to: admin@broncofix.com
>>
>> ********************* BFix Site Sponsor ****************************
>> Cage Offroad Suspension lifts, Offroad accessories and more!
>> http://www.cageoffroad.com
>> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>> List help? http://www.broncofix.com or email to: admin@broncofix.com
>
>
> ********************* BFix Site Sponsor ****************************
> Cage Offroad Suspension lifts, Offroad accessories and more!
> http://www.cageoffroad.com
> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
> List help? http://www.broncofix.com or email to: admin@broncofix.com

Yes, you are seriously splitting hairs. The difference in rotational mass
between the two setups is not significant, as I have tried both. I never
said anything about increasing the unsprung weight, so I have no clue where
that came from. If you don't wheel your EB off road, why even have tires
that big?

The 17" rims do look cool (notice this is listed first, lol). They control
the sidewall flex better then 15" rims on the road and trial for better
stability and less tire hop. Larger rotors and brakes can be fitted. More
4 wheelers are upgrading to 17" rims, and the used 15" rims get harder to
sell.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the 15's, and I do run them on
my EB. But, if I was going to buy NEW rims I would choose the 17's. BUT,
I'm cheap and bought a used set of 15's! LOL

Generally a larger rim for the same tire OD weighs less. One might say
that metal is denser than rubber, but that would be discounting the air
that is also displacing some of the rubber.

Since they aren't the same tire type it not reasonable to say the
rotating mass moved further to the OD with the increase in rim size. It
obviously did move further out since they weigh the same, but we can
not conclude this was solely due to the change in rim size.

Brian, I know you didn't bring up unsprung weight, somehow in my mind it
slid right into this discussion since we are talking about handling
characteristics.

NTSQD, I have actually found the opposite to be true in the comparisons I
was looking at. Overall the weight went up when including the tire and wheel
and it certainly moved the mass further out. I agree the composition of the
tire plays a roll here and I know nothing about the two tires Brian listed
but I believe it I fair to say the mass will move further out as the
majority of the mass that makes up the rim was moved further out as the
wheel gets larger. I really was able to tell a difference on my old
autocross car when I plus-sized the wheels.

Obviously there may be a tire wheel combo that this does not hold true for
but I doubt it. (I was using BFGs for my comparisons.)

The original reason I chimed in was because I was reading a article in a
trade journal discussing the trend towards bigger wheels on cars discussing
the handling and design issues it was causing. The article noted the
increased rotational mass, and unsprung weights as a big challenges.

Generally a larger rim for the same tire OD weighs less. One might say
that metal is denser than rubber, but that would be discounting the air
that is also displacing some of the rubber.

Since they aren't the same tire type it not reasonable to say the
rotating mass moved further to the OD with the increase in rim size. It
obviously did move further out since they weigh the same, but we can
not conclude this was solely due to the change in rim size.

Yes, you are seriously splitting hairs. The difference in rotational mass
between the two setups is not significant, as I have tried both. I never
said anything about increasing the unsprung weight, so I have no clue where
that came from. If you don't wheel your EB off road, why even have tires
that big?

The 17" rims do look cool (notice this is listed first, lol). They control
the sidewall flex better then 15" rims on the road and trial for better
stability and less tire hop. Larger rotors and brakes can be fitted. More
4 wheelers are upgrading to 17" rims, and the used 15" rims get harder to
sell.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the 15's, and I do run them on
my EB. But, if I was going to buy NEW rims I would choose the 17's. BUT,
I'm cheap and bought a used set of 15's! LOL